Dedication to Benjamin Franklin sprinkled throughout, starting with this:
"I hope...that all mankind will at length…have reason and sense enough to settle their differences without cutting throats."
I’m going to be brutally honest here. The minute I realized this would be my next topic, I knew it would be another rabbit hole. I want to keep as focused as possible with my usual process of beginning with origins and intent because as a Nation (and certainly globally), the structure and function of the Press, on the whole, has literally gone so far afield as to be unrecognizable and nowhere near trustworthy. This is not to say that there are not entities and journalists today who hold true to the principles of serving to accurately inform the People with “the facts, ma’am, and nothing but the facts.” However, they have an extraordinarily difficult job in piercing the noise of the very vocal, ever present mouthpieces of the elite while at the same time fending off attacks by those same mouthpieces.
Gone are the days of “The Big Three” (ABC, CBS, NBC) where Joe Citizen got his daily dose of the Evening News before television programming promptly ended at midnight signing off with the playing of the National Anthem. Now, Joe (women included — I’m not PC) Citizen Journalist has had to do his own research and super-sleuthing to determine what’s truth and what’s propaganda for a distinct narrative push while holding down a day job, raising a family, and maybe managing a few hours of quality sleep a night.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In 1816, Thomas Jefferson once said, “Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe” (The Real Thomas Jefferson, 592). Seven years later, he expressed that “The press…is…the best instrument for enlightening the mind of man and improving him as a rational, moral, and social being” (592). These are not naïve statements. On the face of it, the idea of a free press where information can be shared widely and to a vast population is noble and beneficial as long as the reporter and disseminator of the information does so in a completely objective and ethical way. A well-informed public serves as a check on a government falling into tyranny because it becomes harder and harder to get away with things like enacting unjust policies that serve to reduce the People’s life, liberty, and their pursuit of happiness.
And if you think the state of journalism today is a constant, distasteful barrage, especially with the hyper catalyst of social media, you might be surprised to know that it was no less distasteful and constant during the founding of our country. They were well aware of “if it bleeds, it leads” and scandals, even perceived scandals, sell papers as Jefferson stated in 1801:
[The printers] … live by the zeal they can kindle and the schisms they can create. It is contest of opinion in politics … which makes us take great interest in them, and bestow our money liberally on those who furnish aliment to our appetite … The printers can never leave us in a state of perfect rest and union of opinion. They would no longer be useful, and would have to go to the plow (563).
He’s not wrong, unfortunately. Where during the Founders’ time, they had one media tool (the press, aka newspapers and pamphlets), now, it’s newspapers, TV, radio, and the internet. And if Jefferson and his contemporaries thought the delivery of their news was frenetic, I think it’s safe to assume their heads would spin at Mach speed if they were to see what it is today.
Look how much alternative media has exploded, especially in the last 12 to 15 years. I still remember the novelty of Twitter spreading like wildfire through Congress during the 2008 Presidential campaign. The People have grown weary of the hyper-partisan slants and mud-slinging of mainstream media. As a result with necessity being the mother of invention, where there’s a need, there’s always someone stepping up to fulfill it.
Plummeting ratings — literally the upward nose-turning of the consumer — are one indicator that change is necessary to remain relevant. Take, for example, how CNN’s new leader, David Zaslav, has not only seen the writing on the wall, but has acknowledged it and is looking to correct it in this New York Post article by Alexandra Steigrad as she quotes him, “Journalism first. America needs a news network where everybody can come and be heard; Republicans, Democrats.” It is pointed out that the ratings were slumping far before he took the helm, and this new direction has not been without further slumps, much like weaning a crack addict. Going cold turkey can be just as impactful. It’s going to take time to see if true journalism can be accomplished at CNN or if it will just continue as one-sided “opinion news.” Fox News tried it a couple decades ago with “We Report. You Decide” and was constantly under attack by the rest of the network news. Viewers in recent years have been disappointed to see Fox News succumb to the pressure, or at best, be randomly all over the map in their reporting.
When I think about a world where journalism via any medium delivered the facts, I know it is a tall order for two reasons:
To quote a famous line from the movie, A Few Good Men: “The truth?! You can’t handle the truth!” It seems a very pervasive belief (or undercurrent) that the People, if they knew “the truth” would not be able to handle it, and this would cause panic the likes of which would immediately escalate until it was completely out of control. And then it would all be chaos and anarchy. So we must be shielded from the truth. However, how often have we, after the fact, told someone who tried to protect us from the truth (which came out anyway) that it would have been better to come clean, so it could have been addressed?
It’s boring (and hardly lucrative), simply providing facts and letting the People form opinions based on their own discussions. Sex sells, sensationalism sells, scandal sells, controversy sells, conspiracy theory sells, crisis sells, and “controlled” fear of the possible unknown sells. The game of scooping a story in an increasingly competitive news market is brutal, often selling the soul of morals and ethics to achieve a story.
Still, Thomas Jefferson saw the press as “the best instrument for enlightening the mind of man and improving him as a rational, moral, and social being,” and he saw it as a serious duty of editors to publish responsibly. “…an editor should be independent, that is, of personal influence, and not be moved from his opinions on the mere authority of any individual. But with respect to the general opinion of the political section with which he habitually accords, his duty seems very like that of a member of Congress” (592). In other words, like a judge, the editor should be free from influence. The press was often viewed as the “fourth branch” (some would argue, the most powerful branch) where checks and balances could be implemented through informing the People so that they could keep their elected officials honest and true representatives of their will.
Franklin: "Printers are educated in the belief that when men differ in opinion, both sides ought equally to have the advantage of being heard by the public; and that when truth and error have fair play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter. Hence they cheerfully serve all contending writers that pay them well, without regarding on which side they are of the question in dispute" (The Real Benjamin Franklin, 460).
True journalism is hard. It requires checking sources, verifying information, and getting that information out to the People in a timely fashion. Deadlines, deadlines, deadlines. As journalist, Liz Crokin, said in an interview where she talked about how she came up through the ranks of journalism, “My first boss there [at the Chicago Tribune] told me that everything that I should get should be checked over and over and over again and verified to death. That’s how I was trained, and that’s what a true, honest journalist does” (Out of the Shadows).
True journalism requires integrity, often knowing that the blowback from those who would want the truth concealed could result in everything from attempted lawsuits to un-employability to “doxing” to fear for one’s life. A true journalist must weigh some very heavy pressure and blowback and decide if it’s worth it. What I’ve noticed though in the past several years is that while social media has been infuriating, those interested in the truth and in getting the truth out to the People, have used this tool to do just that. Project Veritas is one such well known example.
In his moving American Pravda book launch speech in 2018, James O’Keefe of Project Veritas talks about why he wrote it. He opens with a statement that the Founding Fathers created a government that exists through the consent of the governed, “but that consent must be informed.” He quotes George Orwell, “Journalism is printing what somebody else does not want printed. Everything else is called public relations.” O’Keefe’s book traces back what went wrong with American journalism in the last century. “The most vital and necessary function is to tell the truth to the People…Watergate was the pivotal point where journalism moved away from description and towards prescription…to a pursuit of power.”
What has ensued is a new kind of war, an information war, one where those who control the means and distribution of information on the internet also possess the ability to simply “cancel” those striving to break through the noise of the “approved narrative.” This leads to a discussion on the other side.
The Engine Called Propaganda
Franklin: "Now, many of our printers make no scruple of gratifying the malice of individuals by false accusations of the fairest characters among ourselves, augmenting animosity even to the producing of duels; and are, moreover, so indiscreet as to print scurrilous reflections on the government of neighboring states, and even on the conduct of our best national allies, which may be attended with the most pernicious consequences"(460).
What happens when government finds ways to take over the press and control the information to the People? I know growing up as a kid, when you heard the word “propaganda,” you immediately thought of the (then) Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.), now thought of as solely Russia. When studying WWII, we learned about Nazi Germany’s propaganda machine. Certainly, propaganda doesn’t happen in a free country like the United States.
Right?
It has and it does.
In one of my earlier articles, Treason, Sedition, Insurrection: Walking a Fine (Tangled) Line, I touched on a governmental entity that was set up during Woodrow Wilson’s presidency, called the Committee on Public Information (CPI). Its chairman, George Creel, a former journalist was tasked with achieving the initial goal of the CPI — to get the American public on board in supporting our involvement in WWI. Keep in mind that the country was barely 50 years past the Civil War. There would be plenty of people yet alive with very vivid memories and lasting scars and stories to tell their families, creating a reticence toward involvement in another massive campaign even if it wasn’t on home turf.
Complicating the existing national psyche was the fact that Wilson ran his successful Presidential campaign (barely a year prior) on being a peacetime president — his winning campaign slogan: “He kept us out of war.”
Whoops.
Wilson had to find a way to explain why he now needed to draft millions of young American men into the military. I recall learning that WWI was considered “the war to end all wars,” a very noble-sounding but extremely unrealistic sentiment as history has borne out.
The media narrative plan started with targeting “laborers, women, industrialists, farmers, and immigrants” (“Committee on Public Information” — Caryn E. Neumann), targeting these populations with what was estimated as placing “material in 20,000 newspaper columns each week during the war.” Doing the math, that ends up with nearly 2,080,000 instances of materials supporting the war effort going out to the American population — total saturation. By today’s digital media standards, it’s a small number, but the majority of households then got their news primarily through the local paper. The way to incentivize that the public would get information was that the CPI “published Official Bulletin, a newspaper distributed free to public officials, newspapers, post offices, and other agencies. It carried statements from the government and had a circulation of about 115,000.” Put these two efforts together, and you have hefty saturation.
The next step was to build what was called “an intellectual justification for U.S. involvement in the war.” For that, Chairman Creel sought the assistance of Guy Stanton Ford, a history professor at the University of Minnesota. It was Ford’s job to head the CPI’s Division of Civic and Educational Publications. This division “published more than 100 titles that defined American ideals, indicted German militarism, promoted the expansion of the president’s power in foreign relations, told Americans what they could do to speed victory, and endorsed censorship.” Take a moment and apply this formula to any wars or conflicts in your recent memory: Vietnam, Gulf War(s) — pre- and post-9/11, Afghanistan, Ukraine.
To further cement and drive home the need for red-blooded American support, another division of the CPI, the Division of Pictorial Publicity joined with yet another division, that of Advertising “to create some of the war’s most vivid images in posters designed to demonize the German military. Some of the more infamous posters portrayed a German gorilla with a club labeled kultur and a green-eyed, blue-skinned German soldier with bloody fingers.” So, basically, the CPI became the top cheering squad to whip up enthusiasm for the U.S. entering WWI, and if you weren’t enthusiastic and questioned this venture, then “the government linked any opposition to the war effort, whether by pacifists or communists, to treason. It trampled First Amendment rights, largely because of the success of the CPI in instilling fear through war propaganda.”
The CPI had a go-big-or-go-home gusto about it, and ultimately overplayed their hand, as Neumann states, “many Americans concluded that the committee had oversold the conflict and had created a climate that suppressed legitimate dissent.” However, the committee’s efforts were not seen as a complete failure, rather as a Monday morning quarterbacking opportunity, for when WWII began to rear its ugly head, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt “created the Office of War Information (OWI) to promote WWII [and] the agency viewed the CPI as an example of mistakes to be avoided.”
Rebranded, renamed, and refreshed for a new generation.
Today, under the current Administration, the Department of Homeland Security created the “Disinformation Governance Board” — dubbed by critics “The Ministry of Truth” after Orwell’s book Nineteen Eighty-Four. In his article on this latest governmental creation, Jon Miltimore states:
…Americans should be concerned that the US government — nearly two and half centuries after it was founded — is suddenly in the business of rooting out “disinformation.” Humans will always disagree over what is true. Descartes’ first principle — “cogito ergo sum” posited that the only thing we can know with total certainty is “I think, therefore, I am.” It doesn’t take a philosopher to see that a lot of stuff one finds online is drek, so it shouldn’t surprise us that “misinformation” — in various forms and to various degrees — is rampant online. But history shows that no one wields misinformation and propaganda with greater effectiveness — or at greatest cost — than government.
Franklin: "Without freedom of thought there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech."
The most critical tool a human being has is the ability to reason, to discern, to take in information, decide its veracity, weigh this acquired information against what s/he knows to be true and right and just in a civil, moral society, and then to act (or not act) based upon their own conclusions. This tool is the most dangerous to those in power who wish to retain that power because its retention requires consensus and most importantly conformity — getting everyone on the same page.
It is a numbers game. Those in power are very few in number. Their power is always in danger of being taken away by the many times more numerous People. Knowledgeable, critically thinking people pose an immediate threat to the far outnumbered people in power. Retention of that power requires doing so in a very Machiavellian way where the ends justify the means, and the means often tend toward an “anything goes” approach, no matter the cost.
Given this powerful ability within the human individual, an equally powerful means to erode that ability is necessary. This is done by creating a more compliant and less questioning public to retain power. How is this done?
Think, for example, about when you consume information via the television. It’s after a long, hard day at work. You’re tired, somewhat checked out, and highly suggestible. You want to be entertained to forget about the day and your worries.
In a clip from MSNBC, Mika Brzezinski says to her co-host, referring to President Donald Trump, “The dangerous, you know, edges here are that he’s trying to undermine the media, trying to make up his own facts, and it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think, and that is, that is our job.” Plain as day.
Regardless of your politics or how you feel about any president, the takeaway is the firm belief that the job of the media (journalists, etc.) is to control what the People think, and anyone who runs counter to that must be dealt with. Enter: Committee on Pubic Information, Office of War Information, Disinformation Governance Board. Regarding the latter, contemporary version, the DGB met with severe scrutiny resulting in pulling the plan just weeks after it was announced.
The documentary video, Out of the Shadows, follows how mainstream media and Hollywood have historically been used (continuing to the present) as tools to manipulate and control “the masses” through specific narratives. A FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) document from the 1940s shows how the government controlled motion pictures, using this medium as psychological warfare, including a program that paid journalists to put out certain stories. Modern technology through radio and motion/moving pictures began in the turn of the 20th century with World War I (1914 - 1918). From that point on, RCA Radio (1919), Warner Brothers (1923), NBC Radio (1926), CBS Radio (1927), RKO Radio & Pictures (1928), Mutual Radio (1934), 20th Century Fox (1935), NBC TV (1939), CBS TV (1941), ABC Radio (1943), ABC TV (1948), NPR (1971), HBO (1972), CNN (1980) sprang up. Interestingly, most of the early communications companies were developed for two industries: shipping and aviation and happened through commissions from the military during WWI and WWII.
What complicates the discussion is that in contemporary society, social media (internet) entities have blurred the lines by presenting themselves as both platforms for housing information that people search for, but also as editors of information through something known as “algorithmic fairness.” This raises the question of who determines what is fair?
Un-Blurring the Lines — “Citizen Journalism” Has Always Been a Thing
Franklin: "Our cause is the cause of all mankind…we are fighting for their liberty in defending our own."
We have been slowly trained to believe that freedom of the press refers specifically to what we understand is “The Press” — news outlets, journalists with “credentials,” basically a very specific group of people. I used to laugh a bit at the old classic movies where the reporters had a card with “PRESS” written on it sticking out of their hat bands. Now, they have very official-looking credential badges they wear pinned to themselves or on lanyards, and these credentials get them into all kinds of places that apparently Joe Citizen cannot access — can’t get in without a “press pass.” You may be surprised to know that this is not the case. David B. Sentelle clarifies in his article, Freedom of the Press: A Liberty for All or a Privilege for a Few?
So what does the phrase “the press” refer to in the First Amendment? The first conception is that “the press” refers to the media as an institution, a type of fourth branch that provides an independent check on the three branches of government…The second conception is that “the press” refers to the press as a medium of communication. Under this interpretation, the freedom of the press protects all individuals’ written expression and is complementary to the freedom of speech (19).
All individuals. Not just some reporter who works for some newspaper or news outlet.
In the latter case, he points to Chief Justice Warren Burger’s response to the “press-as-institution” view where he does not see that the Founding Fathers were seeking to carve out a special or institutional protection to a few when the full intent of the Constitution was for all. Burger concludes, “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms” (19). To this, Sentelle deduces, “Does it not seem at least passing strange that a Constitution that explicitly refuses to establish a religion would at the same time establish a professional class?” (19).
Even more critical is this question he poses: “Does it not seem at least passing strange that such a Constitution would afford the right to every citizen to express his or her view in speech, but at the moment that the citizen chose to commit those thoughts to writing, that constitutional protection would vanish unless the speaker/writer belonged to the privileged profession?” (19).
So what does this mean? It means that each and every American citizen has the right and freedom to speak out in written form through whatever medium is available to them to report on and comment on whatever they see. It is their duty and their right to speak out against and raise questions about the dealings and actions of the three branches of government. In other words, the People have, through the freedom of the press clause, to directly make a difference, especially when elected representatives won’t listen to the will of the People.
Now, when you set this against the current blaze of cancel culture, look at these actions. The people and institutions called “the press” see this as a threat to their voice and to their livelihood because if every citizen realized they had the power and the right to express their views, concerns and raise questions about things they see within all levels of government, then again, it’s a math problem that does not work in their favor. Why? because the People are far more numerous than the narrow institution of the press. Over time, the views of the elite press (the propaganda arm), will be drown out into insignificance. Social media, the engine created as an elite press powerhouse has been taken over by the People, and their voice is growing.
Several news organizations (multi-media) have come on the scene as truth-seeking alternatives to MSM (main stream media, including socials like Twitter). The increasingly obvious propaganda tool, strays far afield of ethically and truthfully informing the People so that they can think about, discuss, and decide for themselves on what to believe or what course of action to take.
If I were to point to a template for the kind of integrity the Founding Fathers hoped American free press could be, it can be found in both the Core and Ethical Values that Project Veritas lives by and posts openly on their website. I have done a search of a handful of news sites, looking for their own mission and values statements, and have been disappointed. Check for yourself and send me any you do find. Posting such things serves as a pledge to the People of press accountability, increasing the chances of truth in reporting. I find interesting the lack of transparency on this.
For me, this is the gold standard, and going back to CNN’s new proposed outlook, might not be a bad model to emulate (here’s hoping):
The Core Values of Project Veritas
MORAL COURAGE — Courage is the virtue that sustains all others. We choose to overcome our fears.
WE ARE ALL LEADERS — Turning people into leaders. Completed staff work. Ownership.
COLLABORATION — Best not to work in silos. No one individual is as smart as all of us.
RESILIENCE — Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. never, ever, ever give up. We don’t let mistakes or setback discourage us. Pursue perfection, knowing full well you will never attain it.
MISSION DRIVEN — The best people are motivated by purpose. We are passionate and truly believe in our cause. We must be externally focused, not internally focused.
MAKE THE STATUS QUO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE — We move mountains. failure is not an option. We do whatever it takes.
THE TIP OF THE SPEAR — We are a loss leader. We do not shy away from conflict or litigation.
The Ethical Values of Project Veritas
Rule #1 — Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact-based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the fact or the context. We do not “selectively edit.”
Rule #2 — We Do Not Break the Law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacy’s impact on our right to record.
Rule #3 — We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.
Rule #4 — The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of “vital public interest” and “profound importance.” The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, “…there’s no other way to get the story…” Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.
Rule #5 — We protect the Innocent When Possible — Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens’ personal lives. We look for the individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.
Rule #6 — Transparency. Our methods and tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the “Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder” rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law and ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.
Rule #7 — Verifying and Corroborate Stories — Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone. We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate and truthful. At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.) The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).
Rule #8 — Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release “raw” video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.
Rule #9 — Subject Anonymity. We investigate and question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential source.
Rule #10 — Being Accountable. Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
Rule #11 — We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects’ mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit the truth.
Rule #12 — With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.
True journalism seeks the truth and gets that truth to the People. True journalism is the helpmate of the People to insure that government stays in its proper place: in service to the People, not the other way around. But, the People do not have to rely solely on an institution to fight their battles and ask their questions and report on what they see. Each and every American can add their talent and skills for seeking the truth, for reporting injustices to fellow citizens, keeping each other informed by share, share, sharing.
In the closing of his speech, O’Keefe encourages, “Let’s do the impossible. Let’s show the People that we can bring the information out. Let’s allow people to evaluate information for themselves. Let’s inform a free People. Let’s inform the People of this country because content is king. Veritas.”
Let’s do this.
Resources for Further Information
American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News (James O’Keefe)
Out of the Shadows — documentary on media tactics used throughout history to sway the masses to a desired result
Committee on Public Information (Caryn E. Neumann)
Nineteen Eighty-Four (George Orwell)
“Ministry of Truth” Trends on Twitter After Government Unveils New “Disinformation Governance Board” (Jon Miltimore)
Media Crimes Exposed — How News Media Are Always Lying to Humanity (compilation of videos)
Sens. Grassley-Hawley Letter to DHS Secretary Mayorkas on the Disinformation Governance Board (includes the original detailed outline: Organizing DHS Efforts to Counter Disinformation)
Freedom of the Press (Common Cause)
The Real Benjamin Franklin (Andrew M. Allison)
The Real Thomas Jefferson (Andrew M. Allison)
17 Benjamin Franklin Quotes on Tyranny, Liberty, and Rights (Gary M. Galles)
U.S. Advisors Say No Need for Disinformation Governance Board (Kanishka Singh)
Freedom of the Press in the Eyes of the Founding Fathers (David Wilson)
CNN’s Corporate Boss David Zaslav Wants Network for ‘Republicans, Democrats’ as Ratings Sink (Alexandra Steigrad)
How Woodrow Wilson’s Propaganda Machine Changed American Journalism (Christopher B. Daly)
How the US Government Used Propaganda to Sell Americans on World War I (Patricia O’Toole)
Freedom of the Press: A Liberty for All or a Privilege for a Few? (David B. Sentelle)
Powers of Persuasion — Online Exhibit showing digital galleries of American WWII propaganda posters and video clips from film (includes brief summaries of each item)